Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: julieee
Again, I disagree with promoting pro-abort people by way of promoting the pro-life cause. The ad says isn't it wonderful they weren't aborted, but yet they lived to reach positions of prominence whereby they could promote or exonerate the abortion of many.

I also don't think the promotion of even non-pro-abort famous people as a way of getting the pro-life message across is very intelligent. Every child deserves to live, including the 99.999% who never become famous.

10 posted on 05/23/2009 3:02:13 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: firebrand

Hi FB! Very interesting point. Every child deserves a chance, whether or not he/she is destined to become famous.

I realize this thread is ancient. It came up when I googled (Don’t you love the new vocabulary the Internet has given us?) the terms abortion and adoption, trying to gain some understanding of how any adopted person could take a pro-abort position. People like Faith Hill and Sarah McLachlan make me want to gag. Do they hate their biological or adoptive families so much that they’d rather not be here? Or is it a case of, “Well, I made it. The law protected me. H*ll with everybody else.”? Sickening.

Did you hear about Sarah M.’s despicable treatment of Feminists for Life at her “Lilith Unfair”? She didn’t allow them to have a booth because “Their organization says that a woman doesn’t have the right to choose. I think that’s b*llsh*t.” I found out later she was adopted at birth! Too bad her natural mother didn’t have the right to “choose” in Canada in 1968 (no offense to her fans!). What hypocrisy.


11 posted on 10/15/2009 11:38:39 PM PDT by Tabi Katz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson